Notice period for 5 years service

AP007

Kei wrote: »

The week per year of service rule is usually what the employer issues you when they are dismissing you, e.g. for redundancy. This is the statutory and would supersede what was written in a contract if it were less.

.

No the notice would still be as per the contract. The week per year of service (or 1.5 weeks depends if you are over a certain age, 41 I think) you are talking about its the redundancy payment

PILON would still be whatever the notice period is or they get the person to work and you only leave with the redundancy payment if any.

hawk30

littleredhen wrote: »

I have had a contract whereby it was one week for each year but I am guessing there is no standard here, you can't really say someone is wrong. It is entirely dependent on the company op works for

But this is not what you said in your post. You said that the employer 'would expect 5 weeks notice', as though this was the legal position. Did you misunderstand the OP's post? I read it as though the OP thought the employer statutory one week per year of service applied to the OP, when it doesn't. Did you read it as though the OP was saying their contract was one week per year of service, even though they said they couldn't find the company book? If so, sorry for the 'this is wrong' (although it was wrong).

I've never had a contract that expected one week per year of service, nor ever met anything with this, so it's not standard.

hawk30

AP007 wrote: »

No the notice would still be as per the contract. The week per year of service (or 1.5 weeks depends if you are over a certain age, 41 I think) you are talking about its the redundancy payment

.

No, it wouldn't be as the per the contract. The employer cannot give less than the statutory notice period, so if the contract states 4 weeks' but the employee has worked there for 6 years, the employer is obliged to give 6 weeks' notice.

Kei

AP007 wrote: »

No the notice would still be as per the contract. The week per year of service (or 1.5 weeks depends if you are over a certain age, 41 I think) you are talking about its the redundancy payment

PILON would still be whatever the notice period is or they get the person to work and you only leave with the redundancy payment if any.

No actually, if an employer is dismissing you, they have to give you the statutory minimum and no less, regardless what your contract of employment states. So if my contract stated that they can issue me with 4 weeks of notice to dismiss me, but I have 10yrs of service, in line with the statutory they would need to give me 10yrs of notice, either worked or (if the contract allows) paid in lieu.

https://www.gov.uk/redundant-your-rights/notice-periods

Same goes for redundancy payment calculations. You cannot give less than the statutory, regardless of what the employment contract states.

Kei

hawk30 wrote: »

No, it wouldn't be as the per the contract. The employer cannot give less than the statutory notice period, so if the contract states 4 weeks' but the employee has worked there for 6 years, the employer is obliged to give 6 weeks' notice.

Correct

AP007

hawk30 wrote: »

No, it wouldn't be as the per the contract. The employer cannot give less than the statutory notice period, so if the contract states 4 weeks' but the employee has worked there for 6 years, the employer is obliged to give 6 weeks' notice.

I didn't say less, did I?

My brother is on a 6 mth notice and not been there a year so if he got let go they would have to give him 6 mths pay out.

I assumed the poster was talking about redundancy payments not notice for redundancy

hawk30

AP007 wrote: »

I didn't say less, did I?

My brother is on a 6 mth notice and not been there a year so if he got let go they would have to give him 6 mths pay out.

I assumed the poster was talking about redundancy payments not notice for redundancy

But you disagreed with Kei who said that the statutory notice would supersede what would be in the contract if it were less (the notice in the contract). And if you were talking about payments, why use the word notice in your reply?

AP007

hawk30 wrote: »

But you disagreed with Kei who said that the statutory notice would supersede what would be in the contract if it were less (the notice in the contract). And if you were talking about payments, why use the word notice in your reply?

If you get made redundant you get redundancy pay as well as notice.

Notice and redundancy are both payments.

Anyway 5 years employment don't mean 5 weeks notice

hawk30

AP007 wrote: »

If you get made redundant you get redundancy pay as well as notice.

Notice and redundancy are both payments.

Anyway 5 years employment don't mean 5 weeks notice

I'm not sure if we are talking at cross-purposes. I don't mean to be argumentative.

Do you agree that if the employer gives notice when dismissing an employee the employer is required to give whichever is the greater of the contractual and statutory notice periods.

AP007

hawk30 wrote: »

I'm not sure if we are talking at cross-purposes. I don't mean to be argumentative.

Do you agree that if the employer gives notice when dismissing an employee the employer is required to give whichever is the greater of the contractual and statutory notice periods.

yes greater